- From: George Cristian Bina <george@oxygenxml.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:43:14 +0300
- To: MicroXML <public-microxml@w3.org>
FWIW we use PIs in oXygen for the following cases: top level PIs: - associate a CSS or XSLT stylesheet with an XML document (xml-stylesheet) - associate a schema with an XML document (xml-model) in content PIs: - store track change information (oXygen specific PIs) - store annotation information, user comments on a specific part of the document (oXygen specific PIs) The later are useful when editing the document visually (rendered though CSS) and are just a serialization format of the change tracking and annotation information, marking the positions of inserted/deleted content of of the annotated region. This information can be serialized also in a top level PI but then it may get easily out of synch if the document is modified by other applications, while the in content PIs are more robust. Using PIs for change tracking and annotations allows implementing a single solution independent of the actual XML format and does not require that format to define specific elements for change tracking and annotation. Best Regards, George -- George Cristian Bina <oXygen/> XML Editor http://www.oxygenxml.com On 7/26/12 7:59 AM, Dave Pawson wrote: > On 26 July 2012 03:47, Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net> wrote: > >>> Not sure what my conclusion is. >> >> >> I'm starting to lean strongly towards the hard line of not allowing PIs. I >> think much of their importance is historical, and the degree of added >> complexity is quite a lot for gains of historical importance. > > We have had alternatives using elements/attributes, I agree with > the historical context and utility, even if they have been used for other > purposes. > > I too would prefer to lose PI's. > > regards > >
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2012 09:43:47 UTC